'These batteries maintain approximately 80% of their original capacity after undergoing tests with 500 full charge and discharge cycles in conditions below room temperature (20 °C), while maintaining roughly 60% when above room temperature (45 °C). Furthermore, the batteries demonstrate life span performance equivalent to that of conventional 4V batteries.'

And I thought the Leaf has lousy life time, especially in Arizona!
NEC can show them the way in duff battery chemistries.

DaveR:
I did.
It is still hopeless.

Harvey D:
I have nothing against batteries.
Spouting technological optimism regardless of what the figures say on the specifics is as pointless as doomer depression.

Envia has developed a lithium-ion battery that holds over three times the energy storage of current EV batteries. 400 watt-hours per kilogram vs. 120 watt-hours per kilogram. This goal is already met and independently confirmed by the US Navy Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division

Envia projects the cost at less than half the half cost of other EV batteries. $150 per kilowatt vs. $400 per kilowatt (apparent current cost). They can do this because they are boosting capacity over 3x so material cost per kg of battery doesn't rise appreciably.

The Leaf is getting a bit more than 3 miles per kWh. A 200 mile range EV would need approximately 65 kWh battery pack. Testing has shown >450 100% DoD cycles. That would make a 200 mile battery good for 90,000 miles before falling to 80% capacity.

At 90k miles there would be a choice of installing a new battery pack, continuing to use the vehicle with less range or selling it on to someone who wouldn't be bothered by less range. An EV with more than a 100 mile range would generally be an excellent second car or a great commuting car for someone looking to save money.

A new battery pack in order to get back to 200 miles for another 90k would cost $9750 plus something more for shipping/installation. And your used battery would have some residual value, perhaps half of the cost of a replacement.

Now, something wrong with my math or logic?

(Obviously Envia could be lying, but I'm not ready to believe that without some proof.)

Bob, it would be better to not to charge the battery fully every time, which really stresses most battery packs especially in hot weather. The batteries will last much longer if you limit the times you fully charge (or deplete) the battery to the occasions when you want the full 200 mile range. So, then the batteries should last much longer than 90,000 miles.

Oh yeah, any replacement batteries will have better specs for the buck than the originals.

Bob:
I was deeply appreciative of the open way Envia participated in our discussions here.
What seems to be happening in the battery world in contrast to the 'ever onward and upward' meme is that that there are trade-offs necessary, rather than a generalised increase in all criteria.
In the case of the Envia 400Wh/kg chemistry, that was in power output.
That is fine if you want a really big pack, but even at their low price per kwh that is pricey

For me the most hopeful thing happening at the moment is plug in hybrids, and I am nearly as impressed with Ford's C-Max Energi with 20 miles of all electric range from a 7.5kwh pack (from memory) at a reasonable price as I was unimpressed by their Focus EV.

The ~100kwh pack we would need for anything like ICE performance does not seem to be swiftly getting nearer at other than very high cost.

Envia are certainly more impressive than this NEC press release though, as the battery they are describing does not seem to much improve any major criteria.
Panasonic already have better specific energy in production, that is what is going in the Tesla, and that seems to be what NEC are mainly boasting about on this one.

Off-topic:

How's this for a combination of series/parallel PHEV:

The electric motor and battery takes care of all driving and acceleration below, say 45-50 mph. At highway speed an ICE kicks on with only a clutch and a fixed gear ratio, but no gearbox!

The idea is to utilize that an ICE does not need to run at constant rpm to be efficient but can usually achieve >90% of its max efficiency at a wide range of rpm, e.g. from 1500 to 3000. This concept eleminates both the gearbox (parallel hybrid) and the generator (serial hybrid), both costly and heavy. And in the range from 45-85 mph the ICE has enough power to be charge sustaining and run at high efficiency. At higher speed its efficiency will drop, however this is of little practical importance.

The only drawback is that the car depends wholly on the battery for driving below the cut-in speed.

Any comments on this concept?

I fail to understand how better batteries would increase world hostilities.

Right now we are in the third of our wars for oil.

Can you explain how a war for batteries would get started?

I think you mean not just capacity , but capacity for a given size (mass actually) - so yes, sort of.

but be sure you realize; "energy density is capacity per kilogram"

Watt-hours/kilogram

Those with deeper knowledge pools than I might want to read over this page on Envia. Perhaps they can spot the fatal flaw I can't.

http://enviasystems.com/technology/

I just found it and noticed that they are now reporting >1,000 100% DoD cycles. In a 200 mile range EV those would be 200,000 mile batteries. Forget replacement batteries.

Now we're talking a 200 mile range Leaf with 200k life-mile batteries for less than what the current Leaf costs.

@Thomas Pedersen,
I've been discussing this type of serial/parallel transmission-less HEV concept here in GCC for many year, in relation with the release of the GM Volt. When the Volt was announced to be a purely serial hybrid, I criticized the Volt as being less efficient and less powerful than a serial/parallel hybrid in which the engine torque can be directly coupled to the drivetrain at cruise.

Bein both serial and parallel hybrid means that battery is not required at low speeds, because the engine will turn the generator which will then power the motor indirectly via electrical means. However, that means that you will have to accept losses in the generator and in the motor and in the power electronics. The efficiency will be from 70-85%, depending on load.

Now, then, since rated horsepower and acceleration performance is important to sell a car, if the engine power can be coupled to the drive train at lower speeds to add to the power of the electric motor driven by the battery, then you can easily double the hp output of the engine-motor-battery combination and bring the car into another category above economy class and command a much higher list price. The power combination of a serial/parallel PHEV can easily propel the vehicle into luxury class and transport the owner up into the statusphere!
For that, you will need a 2-3-speed transmission to double to quadruple the engine torque at lower speeds in order to create tire-smoking acceleration to please the motoring enthusiasts who are willing to shell out extra bucks for that type of thrill! You will also need a high power battery instead of a high-energy battery. The generator can also be turned into a motor for even higher rated hp. All-electric range is of secondary importance in comparison to performance.

A gear-change transmission is also important to reduce the size of the electric components for those more thrifty buyers who wants to buy only a minimum-cost hybrid instead of all-out performance. Compare the size of the electric components of the Huyndai Sonata hybrid to that of a Prius.

The problem as metioned by one person here is the POWER density as apposed to energy density.

Some high energy dense batteries are very low power density as in they cant discharge all that fast... The result is in fact the need for a much larger battery to provide a given power output.

So what is the POWER level of this battery?

Also typical batteries used in other cars have cycle lives of 3000 plus... so um ick....